I really don’t understand the genre of “reporting” in which a reporter writes a theoretical attack playbook about what an opponent *might* do before they do it.https://twitter.com/newrepublic/status/1291090347871866887 …
-
It's because they can't travel with candidates and wait for them to incorrectly eat a beloved local food item. GASP. And this line. "Still, the squabbling over the pick this time around has been highly visible and fraught." How short is this person's memory and knowledge base?
If you want to evaluate an individual as a VP pick in a reported story - great! But framing it as "This how Trump will attack..." really rubs me the wrong way.
-
-
It's also a sexist smear. It attacks Harris based on who she dated more than two decades ago, implies she wasn't qualified for her position, recycles false attacks on Willie Brown, & then amplifies Tucker Carlson's racist, sexist attacks on Harris, Susan Rice, and Stacy Abrams.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.